Golf Data Recording Function
GPS rangefinders are popular in the game of golf. GPS rangefinders are used to inform the golfer of the golfer's location on a golf course relative to the location of other mapped areas of interest on the course (e.g. sand traps, greens, etc.) GPS rangefinders are typically available in either cart-mounted or handheld versions. GPS rangefinding functions are also available in cellular phones and personal computing devices. GPS rangefinders can be incorporated into devices that can be worn on the golfer, such as a watch or a device clipped to a belt, hat or other device either worn by the golfer or kept near the golfer during play.
A potentially valuable feature of handheld GPS rangefinders is the ability for the golfer to “mark the location” of the ball and other areas of interest. With existing handheld systems, or systems worn on the golfer, the golfer is able to press a button on the devices to mark the location of the ball. Similar technology could be implemented in cart-mounted GPS systems, but the handheld systems or systems worn on the golfer have the advantage of the golfer being able to walk to the actual location of the golf ball to mark the location. Often golf carts are restricted to “cart path only” access on a golf course and it is often not practical to drive a golf cart to the actual location of a golf ball due to the terrain.
Marking the location of the ball provides valuable information to the golfer. The current systems operate in approximately the following manner: When the golfer hits the first (tee) shot of a hole the golfer presses a button on the device instructing the device to “mark the spot” where the drive was hit. The device records the GPS coordinates of the first shot. The golfer may manually enter, through a manual input interface, other information on the device such as: type of club used (e.g. driver, 5 iron, etc.), type of contact made with the ball (e.g. hook, slice, straight), wind conditions, etc. The current method to enter such data consists of the golfer making selections on the device by pressing buttons, selecting items from drop down menus, etc.
After the golfer hits the first shot, records the location of the first shot and enters data about the first shot the golfer approaches the ball at rest for the next shot. If the golfer follows the same pattern as the first shot (i.e. hitting the ball, marking the spot of the shot on the device, entering other information) the GPS system can store and display the locations of the first and second shots and calculate the distance of the first shot. If this pattern is continued for every shot of the round the golfer would have very valuable data about the golf round including: distance of all shots, locations of all shots and, if entered, type of contact made on all shots, wind conditions for all shots, etc. The golfer would also know the number of strokes taken per hole which, if accurately recorded, would be the golfer's score for the round. However golfers seldom use the features because the process of manually entering data is too labor intensive on a golf course and will lengthen the duration of each golf shot, causing delays in the game. Further, if a data collection system requires action by the golfer it is likely the golfer may forget to take action on every stroke. If the golfer forgets to take action to record a stroke or multiple strokes the system provides the golfer inaccurate data. Further, if the golfer attempts to return to the approximate location where the golfer forgot to record the golf stroke this would result in further slowing down of play which is bad for the game of golf. Patents exist that describe GPS systems with methods for collecting and managing data. Both U.S. Pat. No. 6,582,328 (Golflogix) and U.S. Pat. No. 7,118,498 (SkyHawke) describe such systems that require the golfer to enter golf shot data.
The problem with existing systems is golfers do not want to manually record the data for golf strokes into a handheld device or device worn on the golfer. It is inconvenient for golfers to take the time to look at a device, press buttons, select from drop-down lists, etc. to record information about every golf shot. One could say it is impractical for golfers to do so. Further, if golfers took the time to enter data in such a manual manner it would result in slower play which is not good for the golfers or the golf courses. It is desirable to have a completely automatic system for collecting golf data. U.S. Patent Application No. 60/949,458 and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/170,413 describe such a system. The system described in this patent application includes automated means of detecting when a golf stroke has occurred and which golf club was used for the stroke.
The problem of requiring the golfer to enter data manually is known. U.S. Pat. No. 7,121,962 and U.S. Patent Application Nos. 2007/0135237 and 2007/0129178 (all by Reeves) teach solving the problem using telemetry equipped golf clubs. The solutions taught by Reeves are impractical and fail to address all the issues required to accurately collect and record golf data. Reeves teaches entering data on a handheld device to record golf data, which is not good for the game because it would slow down play. Reeves teaches golf clubs with unique holes in or near the club head that make unique whistling sounds during the golf swing to identify each club. This approach is not practical due to variations in swing speed, wind and other noise variations that would make the system unreliable. Reeves teaches the use of a microphone housed in the handheld device to hear the clicking sound when the club hits to the ball to record the location of the stroke. This does not take into account practice shots between holes and other clicking sounds when clubs hit objects and would be prone to errors.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,030,109 teaches a system for counting strokes automatically by detecting the distinctive sound made by a ball contacting the club face during a hit. The system disclosed seems to be problematic and potentially ineffective for several reasons. Similar to Reeves, this patent confirms a golf stroke by the sound made by the club striking the ball. Because golfers will often hit balls between holes for practice and hit other objects that might sound similar to hitting a ball the system will be prone to errors. A further potential problem relates to the insensitivity to a very gentle putt that generates no characteristic sound pattern. Finally, this system requires the golfer to wear an ankle strap with a microphone in it which golfers will likely not want to wear.
US Patent Application No. 2006/0270450 teaches a voice activated system for collecting and recording golf data. This system requires action (verbal instruction) by the golfer for each golf action to be recorded. Therefore the system does not automatically record golf data. Golfers may not like having to speak instructions for every action to be recorded. Further, golfers may forget to verbally instruct the recording of golf strokes which could result in attempts to return to locations where data was not recorded, slowing down play.
U.S. Pat. No. 7,143,639 and US Patent Application No. 2005/0272516 teach a golf launch monitor that uses RFID tags in golf balls and golf clubs to automatically identify the clubs and balls and to trigger a camera-based launch monitor system. U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/672,365, filed Sep. 26, 2003 teaches passive RFID in golf balls and the identifying of such golf balls by a RFID reader.
Other examples of related prior art for golf data collection and management systems include: U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,705,942, 5,086,390, 4,910,677, 5,127,044, 5,283,733, 5,298,904, 6,908,404 and US Patent Applications 2002/0177490, 2002/0004723, 2001/0045904, 2002/0188359, 2005/0268704, 2005/0272516 and 2004/0147329.
Golf data collection systems will provide golfers with rich data about their golf game but existing systems and systems taught in the prior art above have shortcomings or challenges. The systems described above require either: 1) expensive and sophisticated electronics on the golf club, 2) the golfer remembering to take an action to record every golf stroke (without a reminder) and 3) the golfer wearing an ankle strap with a microphone in it which golfers will likely not want to wear. Some of the prior art systems have technical challenges, such as relying on sound made by the club striking the ball to record every stroke—which may not be technically feasible for all strokes, particularly putts. There is a need for a golf data collection system that requires little or no action by the golfer to enter data on a device.
Application Ser. No. 12/170,413, filed Jul. 9, 2008, entitled “Apparatuses, Methods and Systems Relating to Automatic Golf Data Collecting and Recording”, incorporated herein by reference, describes an automatic golf data collection system. These and further techniques are described herein.
Golf Club Reminder Function
A golfer will commonly remove more than one club from their golf bag when considering how to make an upcoming shot. The golfer does this because they may be unsure of which club to use on the next shot. It is more convenient to have several clubs in hand when deciding which club to use vs. having to walk back to the golf cart for additional clubs. After choosing the correct club to use, the golfer may place the other clubs on the ground. After making the shot, the golfer may select the putter and walk towards the hole to putt the ball and not realize that he/she has left one or more clubs behind. It may then take the golfer a long time to realize that he/she has forgotten the misplaced club. Having to backtrack and reclaim the forgotten clubs slows down the game, is frustrating and may disturb those playing around the golfer.
There are several known approaches to solving the problem of mistakenly leaving golf clubs behind. Such systems are described in various U.S. Pat. No. 7,205,894 (Savage); U.S. Pat. No. 7,106,195 (Keays); U.S. Pat. No. 6,976,563 (Bormaster); U.S. Pat. No. 6,753,778 (Kruger); U.S. Pat. No. 6,411,211 (Boley et al); U.S. Pat. No. 6,366,205 (Sutphen); U.S. Pat. No. 6,118,376 (Regester); U.S. Pat. No. 6,057,762 (Dusza); U.S. Pat. No. 6,023,225 (Boley et al); U.S. Pat. No. 5,973,596 (French et al); U.S. Pat. No. 5,952,921 (Donnelly); U.S. Pat. No. 5,844,483 (Boley) and U.S. Pat. No. 5,565,845 (Hara) and U.S. Patent Application 2007/0191126 (Mandracken).
Some of these systems use distance between tagged clubs and readers to alert the golfer of a misplaced club; some use interrogating RFID transceivers mounted on the bag; some use loops around the opening of the golf bag that sense magnets passing through the loop and some use orientation sensors on the golf clubs. These systems may not be practical or effective for several reasons including: requirement of complex and expensive electronics in some cases; requirement of large amounts of power in some cases; potentially inadequate means of alerting the golfer in some cases. Therefore, there is need for a system that is inexpensive, does not require large amounts of power and effectively alerts the golfer when a club has been mistakenly left behind.
Theft Prevention Function
Golf equipment, specifically golf clubs and golf bags, can be very expensive. It is a known problem that golf equipment can be stolen. Often, when golfers finish playing a round of golf they will leave their golf equipment near the clubhouse, unattended, while they eat a meal, review their golf round with friends, etc. There is a need for a system that will notify a golfer when his or her golf equipment is moved without their authorization. Ideally, such system will help the golfer retrieve their golf equipment if stolen.
There are known approaches to solving the problem of alerting the golfer when their golf bag is moved without authorization. Such systems are described in U.S. Pat. No. 7,205,894 (Savage) and U.S. Pat. No. 5,041,815 (Newton). There is a need for a system with improved functionality over the known art.